JMS really brought something new to the table for Spider-man imo. He mucked up a couple of stories but he's still one of my favorite writers.

im biased in JMS' favor because he brought me into Spider-Man. i loved hi work, even though he did have some major f--- ups

Why is Slott winning? I'm starting to loose faith in the Spidey fanbase after looking at these results.

My vote goes to JMS.

JMS is responsible for story lines such as One More Day and the Osborn (Stacy) twins which annoys me til this day.

For the most part JMS continued to expand upon the mature treatment of Spider-Man with well written dialogue.

Slott's run gave us dumbed down dialogue, sloppy characterizations, nonsensical storylines and messed up cartoonish artwork.

@holyk:

I agree. But that was more to do with Quesada's editorial mandate.

JMS.

Hit all the right points wit hthe character himself.

Slott - Fun, quirky, and imaginative with a good feel for tone and past Spider-Man heritage.

JMS - Mainly just recycled tropes, his run went absolutely nowhere and then the guy retconed himself into oblivion.

JMS benefits, a lot, from being a respectable writer (at least for the first half of his run) who followed a long period of terrible writers.

..Well I am not well versed with either, but the two JMS books I have bought are awesome!

Since I haven't read Dan Slott's run I will not vote.

Nope that is Joe Quesada. Original JMS wouldn't have anything to do with it. Then he jus didn't wanted his name on it and then he ended up getting blame for it all. It was Joe Quesada that as an editor wanted to be a writer which is never a good thing.

JMS wasn't to blame for Sins Past and OMD, it was all MARVELS fault along with that hack Quesada. Btw I'd rather read Sins Past over that Alpha atrocity anyday :P

I definetely recommend everyone to read JMS's Spider-man it is one of the best Spider-man runs, its mostly great, only Sin's past and OMD (which both were editorial mandates) suck. And it can be easily tracked down.

These.

Slott may be a good writer but his Spider-man was mediocre at best.

JMS's stories were perfectly executed (except the ones that were editorial forced). He added a mystical posibility to Spider-man's life without taking away from his scientific origin, he wrote a Peter Parker that wasn't a Gary Sue, he made you care about the supporting cast, his characters interactions where spot on, no one was written out of character, he respected the character and didn't belittle him in his own book, to make another character look better, JMS's stories didn't progress with deus ex machinas and his humor was elegant, there where actual touching moments provoking strong emotions, Peter's emotions where coming strong to the reader through inner monologue which was simple and amazing at the same time.

Ironically despite OMD, JMS wrote MJ and Peter better than anyone else and its not even close.

• and the Other
• and Back in Black
• and The Black Issue

Out of the other ones I've read

• Coming Home was OK though very by-the-numbers (3/5)
• The Conversation was good (4/5)
• Cold Arms was incredibly derivative, but polished (3/5)
• Strange Course of Events was filler, but it was solid filler (3/5)
• Book of Ezekiel was Passable, really didn't end up going anywhere at all but it held my interest while it lasted (3/5)

Based on his Romita work I would class him as a good, but not particularly great Spider-Man writer.

But as a whole the latter half of his work brings his run down to poor overall IMO

@silent_bomber: If you please, what was wrong with The Black issue?

JMS all the way. He brought up some major changes to Spidey and wrote one of the best stories while Slott just wrote wannabee stories that aren't even entertaining.

Why is this even a debate?

BND/OMD wasn't his fault

Sins Past wasn't as horrible as some people make it out to be

It is horribly cliched, contrived, and exploitative.

Worse still when Doctor Doom started crying about 9/11 I burst out laughing, which is not the sort of reaction it should be providing.

Some parts of it actually reminded me of Team America, except it wasn't being tongue in cheek, it was actually being serious

@silent_bomber: So a tribute to all of the rescue workers that worked tirelessly to save people calling them the "real heroes" and honoring the ordinary people involved was exploitative?

Could you point out the "contrived" and "cliched" moments in this comic?

Doctor Doom's crying was added by John Romita Jr., not JMS, and quibbling over a three panel long OOC moment in an issue that was meant to reflect the grand depths of tragedy that America had just undergone is, frankly, idiotic.

@silent_bomber:

*sigh* I would reply but we already had a similar conversation in another thread.

Agreed.

It was tacky and clumsy, real people saved lives and died during 9/11 and Marvel has a bunch of their cartoon characters standing around crying?. What happened was a very complicated world issue yet there is no real content here touching on anything.

@silent_bomber: Yes, and the entire comic was written as a tribute to those people. It's the reason why the "cartoon characters" were in the back, while the real heroes took front and center.

The "cartoon characters" were crying to reflect the way the author's of the issue felt about the tragedy, and I think the issue had plenty of real content based around the resiliency of the ordinary man in the face of a terrible event.

JMS' run is what got me into Spider-man, and so by extension comics as a whole, so my vote goes to him, always liked the semi-mystical aspect he added to the mythos

@vegandiet said:

If you love it then fine, but as far as I'm concerned it was nothing but oversimplified Knee-Jerk Flag-Waving.

JMS's run was one of the best. every spidey fan must read his run. Dan slott is amazing, but its hard to beat JMS.